US Politics Thread

[DSVII]

9 minutes ago, Gator said:

I don't follow her, and never once denied the bias. But for some reason you believe the mainstream media doesn't have a much bigger "agenda" than a youtuber?

 

If you're so close minded to only accepts facts from a mainstream source than imo you're just a puppet. Left wing/right wing your choice. Depends on the network I suppose. Me, I like to watch new outlets from outside sources, and youtubers with different views and see all angles. All of them throw their own spin on shit and push their agenda, but you open yourself to more angles of the same story.

 

Example...

 

I mention Biden saying we should "put Trump in a bullseye" 2 weeks before someone literally did, and people are so quick to jump at me about the context in which he said it. Sure I'll buy the BS of the "context", but still.. You have to admit it's a very strange choice of words to use as a "figure of speech" against your highly scrutinized political opponent. But yet everyone seems to turn a blind eye to it because it's Trump and a lot of people on the left would actually prefer if the bullet hit which is sad, but besides the point.

 

Then you get the "Trump threatened a bloodbath if he loses the election" crowd. As if that's not blown way out of context. Yet somehow you guys spin that to convince people he's the threat to democracy. Even when presented literal video evidence you try your best to discredit it as being just some youtuber showing it to you instead of a mainstream media reporter. Proof is proof if you ignore the yapping in-between.

 

From where I'm sitting, I havn't 1 single time defended Trump when it comes to the nasty shit he can say sometimes. There's no defending it. I said many times I don't like the guy. I do worry about his push back on NATO, but there's no denying he did in fact get them to pay up (and didn't break up the alliance).. I'm listening, but you guys really aren't feeding me much of what I havnt already read/heard, and are doing a very poor job discrediting the facts I handed you.

 

Sure he's made deals that goes wrong but so do all sides. I mean I'm sure if you want to go talk to a group of heavy right wing enthusiasts that's are as deep into Fox and the right wing channels, as you are into CNN and the left wing channels they can throw you the same kinda ticky tack bad deals your side made to.

 

I'm just pointing out some very concerning facts I see, and it's actually scary to see how dismissive yall are to literal facts lol. Very concerning, but to each their own.

 

 

 

I accept facts when they are vetted by multiple sources. And for someone who doesn't follow her you are just spreading her videos everywhere. Youtube is a bad place to get your news IMO. The algorithm works to either enrage you or make you feel special and privy that you can lord over others. Kind of like how you are so easily calling everyone close minded. It's a great feeling right?

 

Let's talk policy. I'm fine to start anywhere, I just gave you a list where Trump weakened the US vis a vis Russia in his actions / inaction. I'm sure others on this board have volunteered to talk with you somewhere.

 

But let's be clear here, by normalizing Trump or easily writing of his ramblings as a joke/not serious, that is a serious oversight.

 

The fact that Jan 6th happened at all should have disqualified him from any consideration. 

 

And again, you don't follow that youtuber, but you are so readily accepting everything she's saying as 'fact' that needs to be discredited? I don't buy it. 

 

 

 

[CBH1926]

6 hours ago, Gator said:

I agree he shouldn't be saying nice things about Putin, but I mean he's not totally wrong. You don't get that kinda power being dumb.. From my POV (Ignoring the bias they spin on those words for you).. Hes simply saying he's a smart man and not to be taken lightly. Which imo is true

 

As for NATO.. That is truly the 1 part about Trump that scares me. I do agree with him NATO should be paying up more. Why should the US be paying up the a** to protect them? Itd be different if they couldn't, but they can, and Trump proved it, because they started paying up when Trump threatened to "not protecting them".. So he was therefore saving a lot of tax payer money

 

Sure Trump said some words that you can twist into your narrative and all you lefties can hold onto it and use it how you will, but if you look at what he really meant with those words he didn't mean he wants Putin to attack these places..

 

ANSWER ME THIS!!!!

If Trump was so willing to allow it then why did Putin annex Crimea under Obama rule, do absolutely NOTHING under Trump rule.. And then under Biden rule he's invading Ukraine?

 

You see this in front of your eyes, but ignore it, then take Trumps words out of context, throw this ridiculous flash narrative to spread Trump fear. That's all the democrats can do is twist his words to make people fear him by painting this false picture as if we're dealing with a Hitler.. And the sad part is people are buying it so much they're disowning their family members that see through the media BS and support him. 

 

You all need to wake tf up.. Idc if you support Harris.. But what really bothers me is how much you buy the BS from your networks that's obviously twisting word

 

EXAMPLE

You can't see true context in what Trump is saying EVER when they twist it to make him sound like a monster

 

But somehow when Biden says "Put Trump in a bullseye" 2 weeks before an assassination attempt yall are so quick to find the true context. I'd say Bidens words a bit more extreme given the events that occurred afterwards, no?

 

Stay blind though.. Hopefully enough democrats wake up.. You people are to smart to be that close minded and easily fooled.. Everything is right in front of your eyes if you really wanted to see it.. Take the left wing glasses off for a few hours 

You sure assume lot of things and when DT says something like “I would encourage Russia to attack them” you spin it into “that’s not what he meant”. Like somehow you became a mind reader or you have the ability to decipher his ramblings. To me it’s very simple, jury that was approved and selected by Trump’s lawyer convicted him in the U.S court. He is a convicted felon and since in my state felons can’t vote or own guns, I surely wouldn’t want one to be my president.

 

Personally I have always supported NATO nations paying their dues, stronger border control, death penalty, being against U.S interventionism etc. But just because I think Trump is a disgrace, that makes me a lefty in your mind. I have been following, Fox News , Breitbart, Oann, Msnbc, Savage, politico, huff post, daily Kos, Rush, info wars etc. for decades. You just figured out now that most media leans one way?

Edited Saturday at 07:54 PM by CBH1926

[Boudrias]

46 minutes ago, Gator said:

Point of post is what have you seen to make you believe Putin would be sitting in Kyiv if Trump was president? When infact Russia did absolutely nothing when he was president, but under Obama he annexed Crimea, and under Biden he invaded Ukraine.. Yet somehow, some way they have you convince Trump is a threat to Ukraines sovereignty. I just don't get how people are buying this crap. 

I consider Trump a threat to Ukraine's security because he will not state a plan where by he will defend Ukrainian sovergnity. He calls for peace talks but that is not a fleshed out plan. There are hundreds of thousands fighting in Ukraine now! It is hard enough to trust Biden/Harris that they want an Ukrainian victory. At least Biden stepped up when he had to. I don't have that confidence that Trump would/will. Some of your points about how Harris gets a pass on her untruths are valid.  

[the destroyer of worlds]

1 minute ago, Boudrias said:

I consider Trump a threat to Ukraine's security because he will not state a plan where by he will defend Ukrainian sovergnity. He calls for peace talks but that is not a fleshed out plan. There are hundreds of thousands fighting in Ukraine now! It is hard enough to trust Biden/Harris that they want an Ukrainian victory. At least Biden stepped up when he had to. I don't have that confidence that Trump would/will. Some of your points about how Harris gets a pass on her untruths are valid.  

He was asked in the debate who he wants to win.  One word is needed.  He rambled and was asked a second time.  Over 400 words and he never said he wanted Ukraine to win.  

[joe-max]

5 hours ago, Gator said:

- who attacks and bullies political enemies and anyone

Happening on both sides. But I do agree his choice of words arent always the best, and can come off very childish at times. Reason I really didn't like him at first (Used to be a Trump hater myself)

 

Disagree. Yes, politics is also exploiting weaknesses and finding vulnerable spots, but Trump is on a totally different level when it comes to insulting, disparaging and hitting out at others than any other politician, I have ever seen, and there have been a bunch of bat shit crazy dudes here in Europe too. Maybe political discourse in North America is more explicit than here, but his demeanor is so far beyond any acceptable level, as main representative of one of the most powerful countries in the world, he would be a very, very, very bad role model and not do the world a favour.

 

who is out ouf control on social media

Yea he probably says some stuff your typical politician don't say online, but to me that could be a bonus. Politicians are notorious to be fake to the public and lie their way into office. For me having someone real (or atleast appear to be real) is a breath of fresh air.

 

If it was purposeful, a tactical measure, I'd get it. But the way he is lashing out, the (irrelevant) things that rile him up and the sheer time that he seems to spend on social media make him look like an erratic, vain social media addict, not like someone fit to run a country. He can rumble endlessly about crowd sizes and Kamala's origin as if there were no important issues, as if he could not make more useful use of his time, how about actually doing something - you know - relevant?

 

who makes (dangerous) claims on the most public of stages about stuff that he heard somewhere on TV

Oh you mean dangerous claims like calling to opposition a dictator, saying he needs to be put into a bullseye, etc.. Not saying Trump hasn't, I'm just pointing out you only see it from 1 side apparently.

 

I rather mean remarks about election fraud, immigrants or political enemies that incite and lead to violence by people who believe him. I'm as neutral as anyone, Trump has just, over years and years of lying, cheating, trying to weasel out, lost all my respect.

 

who manipulates, lies, cheats for personal (financial) gain

So glad you brought this up. This is EVERY politician in a nutshell, and one reason I like Trump. Trump is the ONLY president to not accept salary. Theres also a video I shared a few pages back showing the republican debate when the room was highly in favor of Jeb Bush, where Trump points out that the audience is donors (which he didn't need their money).

 

Yet somehow these crooked politicians that are notorious for lying and cheating the taxpayers for their financial gain have convinced you democrats that Trump is the crooked one ripping off taxpayers for financial gain.

 

When him and Hillary was debating she kept mentioning his taxes to throw that narrative at you guys.. And guess what?.. Trump told us the truth and said he paid 0 taxes. You want to know why? I'm sure you don't but ill tell you anyway.. Your corrupt politicians have tax breaks that allow billionaires to essentially write everything off. Of course Trump took advantage of it, what business man wouldn't.. But given all them facts you'll still blindly buy that narrative just like every other one thrown at you

 

Again, disagree. You make it sound like you have to be a devious, sneaky scoundrel to go into politics. That's not true, I know many politicians that are good people and they are not (only) in it for the power and the money. You, there are actually guys who go into politics, because they want to change things, because they have beliefs and ideals. Sure, to get to the very top, you'll have to be more reckless and ambitious than others, but there is more to it than being an asshole. It is a complex matter and if you don't understand how politics work, you will probably not be very successful.

 

It generally agree that somebody from outside the establishment, a breath of fresh air, someone that goes unconventional ways would be welcome, but that's not Trump. Trump is the class bully that kicks in the classroom door, tackles the teacher out of the way, shows everyone the middle finger, and standing on the desk declares his new school rules through a megaphone. Some scaredy-pants follow him, but luckily there are enough bright and brave people in a school to oppose him.

 

who lacks the capacity to grasp and analyse complex matters

Thats just your opinion. Agree to disagree.

 

He is streetwise and knows how to manipulate people, but that's about it.

 

 

 

[JIAHN]

4 hours ago, Gator said:

I'm not going to get into specifics as I havnt really bothered to keep on on trial, but I do know a lot of things were blown out of proportion about Trump regarding that. However I can't deny he did basically NOTHING to stop it. I can't defend that, but I also know some things I've heard have been proven to be blown way out of proportion to make Trump look bad. Again I am not defending him just stating my opinion on it

 

"Decent folks on both sides" comment was one of the blown out of proportion things if I remember correctly.

 

Again I'm not defending the way he handled it.

 

I believe she even mentioned his tweets about the incident are still up.

 

Gator

 

The USA has benefited from being the leader of the free world since 1942, maybe even long before that, but certainly since then.

 

Every car, home, boat, and education has been paid for by their historical actions............

 

The loans to Europe and Japan, after the second world war, enriched, US capitalism, and allowed the USA a position, where countries were beholden to them. Was there ulterior motives to their actions? Sure! As with all countries generosity. Seldom does a country, not ask for things in return. In the US's case, the US dollar, gives them power over countries that owe, not only money, but support.

 

This has long been the case of all Democrats and Republicans. And in doing so, "All" common Americans have enjoyed potential, even through segregation and such, people of all colors made money. And when compared to many places around the world, their freedoms have been immense. US society, although not perfect, flourished by not having internal wars within their borders. This all the while having race problems. They were in fact able to keep, the KKK, and the extreme right at bay, at least to the point of keeping an uneasy peace.

 

Trump has come along and ripped that scab off, and now you are seeing families against families, Dems against Repubs, whites against colors, rich against poor, this is all because Trump does not respond, and actually by his in-actions, encourages it. To the point of ordaining it, in some cases.

 

Look no further than how European governments are now acting towards the USA, and how world News agencies are reporting. Do not look towards Fox and CNN, but Japanese news, Aljazeera, etc. Look at the BBC news. Even Chinese news reports many of the American incidents, and in many cases, uses them as propaganda, without even lying. 

 

Trump shows the world the USA is morally bankrupt, and with 50% of the population and the Congress, all supporting him. All showing te world their underwear, and that the US is not perfect. Trumps actions have shown by the publics support, that the USA is collapsing, just as the Roman Empire did, just like the British Empire did, etc.........

 

Yet, you somehow think Trump is good for the USA? I think centralist Republicans are good for the USA, but not Trump and his henchmen, and as long as you and others like you support him, he is a threat to your freedom. Bank on it!

 

The funniest things is that, you have enjoyed the last 20 to 30 years of prosperity, from the very same people that Trump is against. That makes me laugh!

 

 

Edited Sunday at 12:17 AM by JIAHN

[stawns]

2 hours ago, DSVII said:

 

It's not debunked  not in the slightest. Jan 6 is proof enough.

 

Trump is hardly scrutinized. The profit motive is to keep this race close. If Kamala had even a fraction of Trumps gaffes it'd be replayed non stop. With OAN and Fox Trump has a great advantage in favorable coverage.

 

In pretty much every other industrialized country in the world Trump wouldn't get anywhere near political power

[Flanny]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

I think Tulsi Gabbard will be the next Republican leader.  She will pull the party more toward the centre...

Tulsi would be a good choice. I don't know about bringing the party more to the middle though. She is a woman so there may be an impression of that, but what could she change from the Republican playbook that would still have them recognizable as being on the right? 

[Elias Pettersson]

7 minutes ago, Flanny said:

Tulsi would be a good choice. I don't know about bringing the party more to the middle though. She is a woman so there may be an impression of that, but what could she change from the Republican playbook that would still have them recognizable as being on the right? 

Tulsi has been a Democrat her whole life. She is a military veteran as well. She could do more to bring both sides together than most of the right wing nut jobs in the Republican Party. And she could do alot more than Kamala too. 
 

She isn’t a war hawk either, so she could get rid of that segment of the Republican Party. 
 

People keep saying we need peace and unity. That can only come from a person who has been on both sides IMO. 

Edited Saturday at 08:33 PM by Elias Pettersson

[Boudrias]

7 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Tulsi has been a Democrat her whole life. She is a military veteran as well. She could do more to bring both sides together than most of the right wing nut jobs in the Republican Party. And she could do alot more than Kamala too. 
 

She isn’t a war hawk either, so she could get rid of that segment of the Republican Party. 
 

People keep saying we need peace and unity. That can only come from a person who has been on both sides IMO. 

I was hoping she would get the nomination when she ran against Biden and Harris in 2020. She did well in the debates, certainly better than Harris. 

[Satchmo]

1 minute ago, Boudrias said:

I was hoping she would get the nomination when she ran against Biden and Harris in 2020. She did well in the debates, certainly better than Harris. 

She also did so well in preparing Trump for the most recent debate.  

[kilgore]

2 minutes ago, Gator said:

Point of post is what have you seen to make you believe Putin would be sitting in Kyiv if Trump was president? When infact Russia did absolutely nothing when he was president, but under Obama he annexed Crimea, and under Biden he invaded Ukraine.. Yet somehow, some way they have you convince Trump is a threat to Ukraines sovereignty. I just don't get how people are buying this crap. To me it's so bloody obvious where the real corruption lies

 

Woooooooosh!

 

You are speaking through a veil.  Tell me honestly in English. 

I will try and decode your statement best I can.

 

Your whole premise is that whomever is sitting in the President's office whenever a war breaks out on the planet.....its their fault!  Dismissing years of build up to that conflict.  So I will mark you down as a "yes" that Roosevelt is responsible for Hitler's rise and the deaths of 10 million Jews.

 

I am also assuming that you believe Donny's claims that his mere presence in the office of POTUS would have stuck fear into the minds of Putin, and other dictators.

You mean the ones he openly admired and lavished with compliments?  Putin who he said was smart and a genius? Who he said he believes over his own intelligence service? Who he met in private in Helsinki without an American translator? Russia the country who's banks his family relies on because American banks stopped lending him money due to the prolific bankruptcies?  The man so weak, stupid, and insecure that he can be bought with a well placed compliment and flattery? Really?

 

And what the hell do you mean by "where the real corruption lies"?  Is that another push of another MAGA lie that its really Zelensky and Ukraine that is corrupt, and Putin is only defending his country from a certain future attack....by attacking?  Do you know how Zelensky attained his position?  The long history of corruption and Russian interference and influence. And the long road to democracy in Ukraine? The political turmoil since 2004?.  

 

How Ukraine went through many elections and resignations and more elections since 2004.  With pro Putin and pro Western EU leaders accused and indicted of corruption.  I think corruption was so instilled into their system after decades of Putin's mafia style oversight it was bound to take decades to ween off of. Candidates that were totally beholden to Putin, vs some only party, or in secret.  The long desire to join the EU by most citizens and how politicians had to walk the line between that and not pissing off Putin. 

 

The citizens themselves only wanted a democratically elected, corruption free, administration, free from Russia's dominance.  It was only after......finally in 2019......Ukraine had elected a non politician, someone who was pro-west pro-EU, but didn't have the baggage of the other old crusty establishment. A comedian stage actor.  Who also promised to get rid of corruption. Someone who was totally free of Putin's influence.  Which is what drove Putin to invade Ukraine full scale. Nothing to lose anymore if he couldn't keep his corruption and pillaging of Ukraine's industrial profits going.

 

Zelensky has since fired corrupt officials on an ongoing basis.  Its not even because Zelensky is personally a moral person, although there's nothing to indicate otherwise.  Its mainly because its in Ukraine's self interest. They are going all in on joining the EU.  The EU requires its member countries to have established oversight into corruption and a robust third party enforcement of that. Zelensky wants Ukraine to be accepted into the EU and so is trying to battle that history of corruption within the elites and establishment of the country.  That is what pissed off Putin to the point of invasion.  He doesn't have a say in Ukraine politics anymore, and he does not want to lose the economic benefits by Ukraine joining the EU instead of cozy agreements with Russia.

 

As Prigozhin, ex head of Wagner pointed out in one of his refreshing moments of clarity.....saying it was Kremlin-linked oligarchs seeking to plunder Ukraine’s resources after its military capture and appointment of a puppet regime in Kyiv.

“The task was to divide material assets in Ukraine. There was widespread theft in the [industrial eastern Ukrainian territory of the] Donbas, but they wanted more.”

 

Follow the money.  The invasion of Ukraine had more to do with the Russian elites tied to Putin losing the kickbacks and profits from Ukraine controlled resources and industries than some made up Nazi enemy or even that Ukraine was going to join NATO and attack them. (NATO is a defensive organization).

[nuckin_futz]

[Alflives]

3 hours ago, Gator said:

Obama in office: Russia annexed Crimea

 

Trump in office: Nothing

 

Biden in office: Russia invades Ukraine, Israel and Hamas are at war, and you have China and Taiwan tension

 

Harris: "If Trump was in Putin would be sitting in Kyiv right now"

 

 

 

One wants to start peace talks, the other seems solely interested in taking out Russia (a major nuclear threat). Not at all advocating for Russia. I'm just stating VERY IMPORTANT AND OVERLOOKED FACTS BY MANY.

You do realize Crimea is Ukraine, right? 

[Satchmo]

1 minute ago, nuckin_futz said:

Why does that font look familiar?

[Gator]

15 minutes ago, Alflives said:

You do realize Crimea is Ukraine, right? 

Did something in the post suggest I didn't?

[PistolPete13]

2 hours ago, Satchmo said:

You just keep on talking.  When will you listen?

He listens to Bret Cooper’s tripe. Pages and pages promoting her viewpoints. What a joke. 

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, Satchmo said:

She also did so well in preparing Trump for the most recent debate.  

At least Tulsi got some actual real votes from people in the primaries. How many votes did Kamala get?  
 

Kamala literally read off a script in the debate. She was well prepped. She did another interview 2 days ago and looked like her old self again, so she probably needs prepping for every interview. 

[Satchmo]

1 minute ago, PistolPete13 said:

He listens to Bret Cooper’s tripe. Pages and pages promoting her viewpoints. What a joke. 

People are free to listen to a failed actor who is married to an advertising executive and has found a home on the internet if they wish to.  I just want the guy to actually read and give a moment of consideration to what others post in response. 

[Duodenum]

Americans should always be thankful that Pence put the constitution over Trump. Things could've got way uglier if he hadn't.

 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

@Satchmo is confused today. I think he needs to spend time with the family and regroup. Enjoy your Saturday.  

[Coconuts]

1 minute ago, Duodenum said:

Americans should always be thankful that Pence put the constitution over Trump. Things could've got way uglier if he hadn't.

 

 

 

The fly that landed on his head would be a better president and it's dead

 

[Satchmo]

2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

At least Tulsi got some actual real votes from people in the primaries. How many votes did Kamala get?  
 

Kamala literally read off a script in the debate. She was well prepped. She did another interview 2 days ago and looked like her old self again, so she probably needs prepping for every interview. 

There is a long list of politicians (and many others) who have become better at things the more they do it.   Must everyone be a child prodigy to be respected?

 

And we know the bolded because...?  I have heard recently from a well trusted source that she was wearing an earpiece during the debate.  Maybe that failed during the interview.

 

As you may have guessed by now, I think Tulsi has gone off the rails.  Not as far as Laura Logan but close.

[Satchmo]

6 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

@Satchmo is confused today. I think he needs to spend time with the family and regroup. Enjoy your Saturday.  

And this is a concern for you because?  Please describe my confusion in order that I can grow and improve. 

[kilgore]

2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

At least Tulsi got some actual real votes from people in the primaries. How many votes did Kamala get?  
 

Kamala literally read off a script in the debate. She was well prepped. She did another interview 2 days ago and looked like her old self again, so she probably needs prepping for every interview. 

 

She literally did NOT read off of a script.  The rules dictated that.  Yes she was well prepared. She also looked a little nervous at first, this being, you know, her first POTUS election debate. So that's where preparation comes in, even if at the beginning it sounded like she's just reading off of a script.  And yes, she needs prepping.  Every sane viable candidate should be prepared each time don't you think?.  And not live by their own hubris that their prep of shouting out a mish mash of movie characters and fake news stories, and just plain bizzare claims at adoring rally crowds is enough.